Associate
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 1,439
If everyone is thinking like this, your missus might very well be the only one turning up, so instant job!
Bleeping furious right now!
- Thread starter C.#
- Start date
If everyone is thinking like this, your missus might very well be the only one turning up, so instant job!
This has got to be a troll post surely? It's essentially 'forcing' sub-minimum wage work full time, how is that even remotely encouraging her to apply for a decent role, something which takes a reasonable amount of time to do?
Associate
- Joined
- 11 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 1,249
Oh dear, I'm on my second week of unemployment (redundancy), is this what I've got to look forward to?
I'll probably come across very abbrasive but..
Well, to begin with, it is my taxes. I & others are paying taxes to fund those £200 a month, which we shouldn't because I can't see why I should pay taxes for your partner to sit around.
The alternative that you would rather her have is what?
a) Carry on sitting around doing nothing AND getting paid a handout until she finds something she likes, or,
b) The JobCentre to find her a much better job - again without her putting in any effort.
Where is this sense of entitlement coming from?
How about the following: Unless she can get a job on her own she doesn't get any £ at all and no support from the JobCentre? Sounds fair to me.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,766
- Location
- Welling, London
Are you sure you have this right.
By my calculations, thats a 55 hour week. I can't see the jobcentre allowing that length of week for one of their schemes.
If they are asking this. then it is disgusting.
By my calculations, thats a 55 hour week. I can't see the jobcentre allowing that length of week for one of their schemes.
If they are asking this. then it is disgusting.
Yeah if it comes be I will tell her to tell the job centre to shove it up they're *** and I will look after her until she finds a decent job. Heck I wouldn't even mind if she could only work in retail for the time being, as long as she was being paid for it.
Don't tell me paying someone little over £1.20 an hour is a wage. That is disgusting.
Oh and for the people saying this is good for companies etc, YOU ARE STILL PAYING THE BILL, the JSA will continue to pay her if she says yes and the only people winning here are the companies that take advantage of this, so now the only difference is that before companies had to pay they're staff, now your taxes are doing they're job for them.
Don't tell me paying someone little over £1.20 an hour is a wage. That is disgusting.
Oh and for the people saying this is good for companies etc, YOU ARE STILL PAYING THE BILL, the JSA will continue to pay her if she says yes and the only people winning here are the companies that take advantage of this, so now the only difference is that before companies had to pay they're staff, now your taxes are doing they're job for them.
How about a system that requires a number of applications be submitted each week before payment can be obtained?
People seem to forget that the JSA is there to help people legitimately seeking jobs. How on earth is the example in the OP desmonstrating this?
If she's not thick, and has unspecified A levels, perhaps she should aim a bit higher than jobseekers allowance?
I'm not buying the CV comments. I can't see that two months of (unpaid) work experience at a book shop looks better than two months unemployed. It makes it clear that you're both desperate for work, and incapable of finding any, whereas unemployment can be explained away.
I'm not buying the CV comments. I can't see that two months of (unpaid) work experience at a book shop looks better than two months unemployed. It makes it clear that you're both desperate for work, and incapable of finding any, whereas unemployment can be explained away.
Not a troll.
I agree that in this circumstance the particulars aren't ideal, The hours are a bit extreme and the work isn't relevant to her job search.
However, it's better than the old system in most cases.
So why don't you provide for her like you said?
How long has she been out of work?
I think this is a decent scheme if people have been given a fair chance to find work on their own. The only thing is the hours seem extremely harsh. What's up with 9-5?!
Edit: sorry I see you said 4 weeks. That's a bit harsh. It should be 6 months or something.
That system didn't work.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 32,247
- Location
- Leafy Cheshire
Rubbish, a gap in your CV due to being out of work looks terrible, uni students are always being asked to differentiate themselves from the masses, this is usual down to the volunteer work they have done in the past.
Works wonders for them, shows they don't want to sit around all day watching daytime TV, they actually have the getup and go to try and get themselves out of the situation.
That's all fair and all mate and I don't think you sound abrasive at all, I think you sound quite fair and I respect your point of view.
But mate, one thing is thou, it's MY taxes as well, and I would rather MY taxes be used to help single parents and people in need, then to fuel some rich fat cat CEOs Switzerland bank account.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,766
- Location
- Welling, London
I dont mind people having to do some work for their JSA, but surely it should be for a public service at decent hours. Not to line the pockets of a national book store.
I see no reason why it couldn't work if appropriate administration and safeguards were put in place.